MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890430207 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b01246

Updated Global and Oceanic Mercury Budgets for the United Nations Global Mercury Assessment 2018

2018· review· en· W2890430207 on OpenAlexafffund
P.M. Outridge, Robert P. Mason, Fei Wang, Saúl Guerrero, Lars‐Éric Heimbürger‐Boavida

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesCanada Research ChairsNatural Resources CanadaUnited Nations
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Environmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In support of international efforts to reduce mercury (Hg) exposure in humans and wildlife, this paper reviews the literature concerning global Hg emissions, cycling and fate, and presents revised global and oceanic Hg budgets for the 2018 United Nations Global Mercury Assessment. We assessed two competing scenarios about the impacts of 16th - late 19th century New World silver (Ag) mining, which may be the largest human source of atmospheric Hg in history. Consideration of Ag ore geochemistry, historical documents on Hg use, and comparison of the scenarios against atmospheric Hg patterns in environmental archives, strongly support a "low mining emission" scenario. Building upon this scenario and other published work, the revised global budget estimates human activities including recycled legacy emissions have increased current atmospheric Hg concentrations by about 450% above natural levels (prevailing before 1450 AD). Current anthropogenic emissions to air are 2.5 ± 0.5 kt/y. The increase in atmospheric Hg concentrations has driven a ∼ 300% average increase in deposition, and a 230% increase in surface marine waters. Deeper marine waters show increases of only 12-25%. The overall increase in Hg in surface organic soils (∼15%) is small due to the large mass of natural Hg already present from rock weathering, but this figure varies regionally. Specific research recommendations are made to reduce uncertainties, particularly through improved understanding of fundamental processes of the Hg cycle, and continued improvements in emissions inventories from large natural and anthropogenic sources.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations443
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207